(2020-07-21, 23:44)Orion Pobursky Wrote: Actually, the more I think about this, there more it doesn't make sense. For programs that don't know the !TEXMAP meta, the non 0!: lines would be rendered regardles of where they were. For those programs that do recognize !TEXMAP, why go through the trouble of implementing support and not support texmaps? As I said in my reply to Roland, the spec needs another clarification.
The intent was that "the first set of geometry" referred to the geometry1 and geometry2 lines, and the second referred to the fallback lines (geometry3). I suspect that over the evolution of the spec creation, this was written before the first bits were explicitly called out as geometry1 and geometry2. To be clear, "geometry1" refers to TEXMAP lines with 0 !: prefix, while "geometry2" refers to TEXMAP lines without that prefix. Furthermore, it's perfectly valid for them to be mixed and matched, although the spec certainly implies otherwise.